The Court disposed of three writ petitions concerning land acquisition. Withholding of possession for 25 acres and payment of compensation were addressed. The petitions against the Land Acquisition Act 1894 were dismissed due to the enactment of the 2013 Act.
Primary petition disposed; interim order vacated. Other three writ petitions dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No. 10436 of 2011, W.P.(C) Nos.9985 & 16000 of 2013 &
W.P.(C) No.3075 of 2019
Uttam Kumar Sahoo and others …. Petitioners (In W.P.(C) No.10436 of 2021)
Akhila Patra and others
(In W.P.(C) No.9985 of 2013)
Manoranjan Nayak and others (In W.P.(C) No.16000 of 2013)
New Jagannath Colony Village Committee (In W.P.(C) No.3075 of 2019)
Mr. Digambara Mishra, Advocate -versus-
…. State of Orissa and others Opposite Parties Mr. Debakanta Mohanty, Addl. Government Advocate Mr. P.K. Mohanty, Senior Advocate Mr. Sarada Prasad Sarangi, Advocate
CORAM: THE CHIEF JUSTICE JUSTICE R. K. PATTANAIK
ORDER
Order No.
W.P.(C) No.10436 of 2011
11.05.2022
Page 1 of 2
been left for the villagers, notwithstanding, that the compensation was already paid for it.
W.P.(C) Nos.9985 & 16000 of 2013 and W.P.(C) No.3075 of 2019
(Dr. S. Muralidhar)
Chief Justice
(R. K. Pattanaik)
Judge
S. Behera
Page 2 of 2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitions survive given the additional land held for villagers and payment of compensation.
Whether the Land Acquisition Act 1894 requires directing release of land if the 2013 Act is enacted.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Uttam Kumar Sahoo and others
State of Orissa and others
R. K. Pattanaik
S. Muralidhar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
